AIIC v. Cafey

THIS OPINION HAS NO
PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY
PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

American
International Insurance Company, Appellant,

v.

Christine
Caffey and Richard Caffey, Individually and as Husband and Wife, and as
Co-Guardians ad Litem for Erin C., a Minor Under the Age of Fourteen years, Respondents.

Appeal From Anderson County

J.C. Buddy Nicholson, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2011-UP-082 

Submitted February 1, 2011 – Filed
February 24, 2011

REVERSED

Timothy A. Domin, of Charleston, and James
P. Walsh and Sean Scoopmire, of Greenville, for Appellant.

Steven M. Krause and Steven B. LeFevre, of
Anderson, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM:  American
International Insurance Company (AIIC) appeals from the trial court's order
granting Christine and Richard Caffeys' (the Caffeys[1])
motion for summary judgment, arguing the trial court erred in finding AIIC failed to make a meaningful offer of underinsured motorist (UIM)
coverage and reforming AIIC's policy to provide the Caffeys with UIM coverage.  We reverse[2] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the
following authority:  Wiegand v. United States Automobile Association, Op.
No. 26919 (S.C. Sup. Ct. filed Jan. 31, 2011) (Shearouse Adv. Sh. No. 4 at 17)
(reversing the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of insured,
and finding USAA made a meaningful offer of UIM coverage to insured because USAA
met its burden with regards to Section 38-77-350 of the South Carolina Code
(1997)).

REVERSED.

HUFF, SHORT
and PIEPER, JJ., concur.

[1]  AIIC's complaint named Christine and Richard Caffey
individually, as husband and wife, and as co-guardians ad litem for their minor
daughter, Erin C.

[2]  We decide this case without oral argument pursuant
to Rule 215, SCACR.